Abstract
One strategy for defending paraconsistent logics involves raising ‘normative arguments’ against the inference rule explosion. Florian Steinberger systematically criticises a wide variety of formulations of such arguments. I argue that, for one such formulation, Steinberger's criticisms fail. I then sketch an argument, available to those who deny dialetheism, in defence of the formulation in question.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 61-70 |
| Number of pages | 10 |
| Journal | Thought: A Journal of Philosophy |
| Volume | 6 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| Early online date | 3 Feb 2017 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2 Mar 2017 |
Keywords
- Paraconsistent logic
- Explosion
- Normative
- Reason
- Bridge principle